The Islamic Personality by Sheikh Taqīuddīn An-Nabahānī

The Khalifah is the general leader of the Muslims in order to establish the Islamic Shar’a rules, and carry the Islamic da’wah to the world. So establishing the Shar’a and carrying the da’wah to the world are the two matters for the sake of which the post of the Khilafah exists; so both of them are the work of the post of the Khilafah. It is not correct for anyone to supervise them other than the Khalifah nor is it allowed for the Khalifah to establish someone who would supervise both of them instead of him because they are the two matters upon which the bay’ah is given and the bay’ah contract takes place upon his person. So he is not allowed to delegate someone else to perform the work upon which the contract took place. This is because each contract which occurred upon the contractor’s person like the employee, agent and partner it is not permitted for him to delegate someone else to perform the work over which the contract took place. When the Khilafah contract occurs upon a specific person, it is not allowed for this person to delegate someone else to stand in his place in what the Khilafah contract occurred upon his person, which is the general leadership of Muslims to establish the Shar’a rules and carry the da’wah.

Accordingly this clarifies that carrying the da’wah is what the Khilafah was established for i.e. the existence of the Khilafah, as it is, exists in order to perform. It is not permitted for other than the Khalifah to supervise it even though it is valid for each Muslim to perform it. Therefore the carrying of the da’wah, even if it is obligatory upon all Muslims and every individual can perform it; nevertheless, none can supervise it except the Khalifah.

The Khalifah’s supervision of the carrying of the da’wah has a specific method which is jihad; and jihad only exists with the presence of the mujahideen, the power which is prepared for fighting and the fighting itself. Therefore the existence of the army, its preparation and the work which it performs is the method of carrying of the da’wah to the world. Accordingly it is the Khalifah who supervises the leadership of the army since he is the one who supervises the carrying of the da’wah so he is the one who supervises the jihad. So he, not any other, supervises the leadership of the army. The supervision of the army leadership is not undertaking its administration, training or undertaking any technical matter within this rather these are all styles and means. The Khalifah, even though he supervises its affairs with a general supervision, does not perform this. Rather supervising the army is supervising its formation, preparation and supervising the matter of undertaking its work. This is because the soldier who is attached to jihad (i.e.) the mujahid, the strength prepared to terrorise the enemy and the fighting are considered of the actions of jihad so accordingly Allah (swt) commanded them when He commanded the jihad; and the fighting itself is jihad. Therefore the supervision of the mujahideen, their training, and their performing the fighting is only for the Khalifah and no one else. So the meaning of the Khalifah’s leadership of the army is that he supervises, not anyone else, the planning of policy related to creating the army, preparing and strengthening it, and the policy related to its performing its work i.e. fighting. And (also) that he supervises, not anyone else, the direct supervision of the execution of this policy. Therefore it is the Khalifah who supervises planning all military policy, internal and external, and planning the war policy, internally and externally; and it is absolutely not correct for anyone else to supervise this. Yes, it is permitted for him to seek assistance from whoever he wishes in planning this policy and supervising its execution, but he is absolutely not allowed to leave someone else to supervise it. This is the meaning of the Khalifah’s supervision of the army’s leadership. It is not allowed for other than the Khalifah to supervise this leadership in any way whatsoever.

There are two questions arising from the place of the army itself in respect of it being the power with which jihad is performed in its capacity as the sole method of the Khalifah’s supervision of the carrying of the da’wah, and in respect of it being the power which stands to protect the authority of the Khilafah i.e. the State internally and externally. As for the question arising from the position of the army in respect of it being the power with which jihad is performed in its capacity as the method supervised by the Khalifah in the carrying of the da’wah, this is a question related to the State’s foreign policy in which the army and military considerations have no place. This is because the foreign policy of the Islamic State is based upon carrying the da’wah to the world, and since the method of the Khalifah’s supervision of the carrying of the da’wah lies only in jihad thus the Islamic State is in a perpetual state of jihad. Accordingly the whole Islamic Ummah believes that war between her and the rest of the States is possible at any time and that the State’s policy must be based upon continuous preparation for jihad. Since fighting practically is not allowed except after first conveying to them the Islamic da’wah in a manner which captures the attention, therefore the policy of the Islamic State aims at creating a situation between it and other States which enables the conveying of Islam to peoples and nations in a way which captures attention; and that is based upon preparation to enter into war at any moment if the carrying of the da’wah requires this. Creating the situation which enables conveying the Islamic thoughts and rules in a manner capturing attention is an inevitable matter, as it is one of the rules of jihad and the basic condition to initiate fighting practically. Therefore it is obligatory upon the Khalifah to create this situation and it is obliged upon him to use the utmost effort of his capability in the way of creating it. He must spend whatever money is required to create it just like he must traverse danger in order to conquer, defend the might of Islam or protect the sacred charge of Muslims. Accordingly increasing the military strength, attention to military preparation and complete attention to military evaluations are essential elements in creating this situation and preserving it since the military strength is the sole shield against the strength of disbelief and the disbelieving states. This is what gives the army or military power an effect in the Khalifah’s supervision in carrying the da’wah; this means that the army and beweaponed power have an influence in foreign policy as they are its pillars from where comes a danger to the foreign policy i.e. upon the Khalifah’s supervision over the carrying of the da’wah. Accordingly it is obligatory to understand the reality of the issue in respect of the army’s influence in the Khalifah’s supervision of the carrying of the da’wah i.e. in respect of the danger of this upon the State’s foreign policy. If this danger is not understood in its reality, this will result either in stopping in the carrying of the da’wah to the world or confusion and tumbling down in the foreign policy. The building of the military strength of the Islamic State is not merely defensive preparation only; rather it is an obligatory matter which is inevitable in order for the Khalifah to undertake what the Muslims pledged him upon i.e. for the State to undertake what Allah (swt) obliged upon it which is the carrying of the da’wah. Or, in other words, for the State to undertake its foreign policy in the way Allah (swt) obliged it and to preserve this policy to remain moving correctly and productively. Therefore building the military strength, on top of its being the sole armour possessed by the Ummah against the terror of belligerent disbelievers and their possible attack, is the sole method to make the State’s foreign policy an Islamic policy.

However even though the Islamic State is inevitably obliged to build military strength via a strong military apparatus, this does not mean that military considerations dominate over the State’s foreign policy nor that the military apparatus has influence, whether big or small, over the foreign policy. This is because the military opinion is an opinion by a specific profession emanating from those whose job is to guarantee the State a military excellence if war occurs between it and other States. Naturally and practically, their opinion encompasses all precautions; but it is not permitted that it exceeds in its consideration as being advice only; nor is it permitted to exceed being the advice of persons in a specific profession whose thought does not exceed a specific aspect in this subject. Accordingly it is not correct to follow this advice in everything, small or large; nor is it correct to study it except in the place it occupies in a general study of foreign policy. It is adopted in its technical expertise only, so it is taken when it is its technical expertise and what is taken within it in its place in the foreign policy; it is advice and not consultation. That is, the Khalifah seeks it when he studies foreign policy and it is permitted to listen to it when it is said for mere listening on condition that it is in the situation of careful attention to the foreign policy and careful attention to the place of this advice in the resolutions of the foreign policy. It is it allowed to give it more (regard) than that. This is because if he does not do this, and gives it greater consideration than it being mere advice, there will without any doubt be danger to the foreign policy; either confusion or tumbling down in the foreign policy or the halting of the carrying of the da’wah. Infact, there could be more than that as there could result tumbling down of the State and siege from the area upon which its authority is spread. Therefore it is not allowed to give the military opinion more (regard) than being merely advice.

When soldiers fulfil their work in their military capacity, they fulfil it as people of expertise. They do not permit into their considerations the benefiting from world public opinion or whether the invitation to Islam has been conveyed in a manner capturing attention; and their influence in meeting the enemy. They do not attempt to take into their measurements the redoubtable possibilities in the spiritual and morale strength; nor do they take concern to understand the actions of the da’wah carriers who live in the enemy lands or who go there for da’wah. They do not understand diplomatic means or the great influencing value of political actions. Due to this, military thinking is a subjective thought and not comprehensive political thinking. If their advice is taken it is valuable advice in its subject, but if they are given the authority of action and resolution, and if their advice has any type of compulsion this will without doubt cause harm to political steadiness and conduct. Therefore it is not allowed to permit the military apparatus to have influence in the foreign policy and the military opinions do not occupy a place exceeding their being no more than mere technical advice, not being general advice.

However, restricting the place of soldiers’ opinions to being mere technical advice does not mean neglecting military evaluations; rather its meaning is only that the Khalifah must make his evaluations dominant over military evaluations. It is upon him, when he plans the final plan to be ready in bearing the responsibility by ignoring purely military evaluations at certain times. He must make the evaluations of non-soldiers such as the assistants (mua’winin), governors, people of influence and scholars as more (worthy) than military evaluations; nevertheless the Khalifah must value the position of high ranking soldiers in the State, whether in respect of defending the land or initiating jihad with the disbelievers. Therefore it is obligatory upon him and the whole Ummah to preserve military strength just like the individual preserves the gift of his eye(s). However it is the politicians, not the soldiers, who dominate the planning of foreign policy and they are the ones to resolve how to prepare to face the dangers of war, when should they enter into war if it occurs and when this occurs how quickly and when. It is obligatory upon the Khalifah to always make the military power a following department and also not to allow the military apparatus, or any individual, to exceed the role of the following policy.

This is in relation to the role of the military apparatus and its opinions. As for how the Khalifah evaluates military evaluations, it is not sufficient to adopt them as no more than mere technical advices then give military evaluations an influence in his decisions on the foreign policy. Rather military evaluations must be considered as mere advise, and it impossible that there is influence of this advice on the foreign policy i.e. it is not allowed for him to base the foreign policy upon it or that it has an effective impact over it. It is forbidden that military evaluations dominate the foreign policy; rather it is obligatory to leave military evaluations at the margin of the State’s foreign policy. Military evaluations must remain, in their being military evaluations whether emanating from soldiers or civilians in a place distant from influencing the Khalifah when he plans the foreign policy.

Military matters take a distinct tangible form. If you are able to see cannons, military ships, planes, bases, nuclear bombs and missiles; and you are able to be convinced easily and without difficulty about their influence in success or defeat in conquest or siege, advance or retreat. These are material things whos dimensions can be measured; they have a material influence whose results are possible to be sensed. This is opposite to spiritual and morale strength, and political manoeuvring and regional and world public opinion as these are not material matters. It is not easy to understand their influence and sense their results since they are intangible things, unseen and unsensed though they are very important and of higher vitality in foreign policy and even in war and conquest. Therefore military evaluations must remain at the margin of foreign policy so as to remain secondary there in whereas spiritual strength comes first and then the morale strength is dominant. Political manoeuvrings and subtleties must have a prominent place in evaluation, and that all these should be collected together in a united political strength which is not subjected to separation, supervised by one Khalifah. From this we can understand three meanings of the Khalifah’s supervision of the army leadership solely and practically, and the danger of giving the army formal leadership or supreme command as has come according to some expressions.

Making military evaluations dominant over foreign policy as was done by some Khulafaa had a terrible influence leading to halting the carrying of the da’wah to the world in the second period of the Abbasid age and the end of the Ottoman age. Islamic conquests stopped in the Roman land at the limits of Turkish lands in the side of Bilad AsSham, and in Western Europe they retreated from France and stopped at the Spanish borders despite the fact that the spiritual energy remained strong and Islamic thoughts were in the age of concentration and consolidation. However, when soldiers would give their opinions about their strength and the enemy’s strength, and made these opinions the first consideration in entering war or not, the deciding decision was the summer and winter campaigns so that jihad remained existing in working according to the Shar’a rules without going beyond this to be political actions or political evaluations. In the days of the Ottomans, the Islamic armies reached the walls of Vienna in Austria after sweeping Europe including Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania and Yugoslavia so that the authority of Islam spread over all these quarters. Until the public opinion in Europe was that the Islamic army could not be conquered. When military evaluations dominated foreign policy as an effect of the industrial revolution which occurred in Europe in the eighteenth century CE, the spread of Islam stopped and the ebb began which led to the complete destruction of the authority of Islam.

This is in as far as the army is the power with which jihad is performed. As for it being the power which stands to preserve the authority internally and externally, this is related to the material power in respect of it being the authority’s life i.e. the rule. It is the one which protects it, and it has the potential to destroy it and the potential to establish it, though only temporarily. Therefore the place of the army and armed forces is an important place in the authority in its essence as an authority. This inspires (one) that the army has a large influence in the authority; however, the reality is that even if it allowed for the military evaluations to have a presence in foreign policy in relation to taking their advice, it is not allowed in any situation for the military apparatus nor for any individual within it to have a presence in the authority more than his being a soldier. This is because the authority, even if it is preserved by the military apparatus, there is no presence for soldiers within it. The authority is not a tangible material power or dependent upon material power; rather it only executes (tanfeedh) the system of relationships in the society and depends upon the Ummah or people since it is concealed in reality within them, or the stronger section among them. Soldiers and the military apparatus have no relationship with them. Yes, soldiers do undertake the execution and it cannot possibly exist without material power i.e. without soldiers, but their role in it is the role of a tool and nothing else. It is not allowed for their role in execution to exceed the role of a gun in a soldier’s hand when he fires upon the enemy; i.e. (the gun) has absolutely no will nor its own opinion regarding that. It is dangerous for the rule (hukm) to have soldiers in the authority i.e. the rule in any situation whatsoever. Verily any role for them within it, however little, will make it a police state like the role of the police officers (in relation) to prisoners, not an authority which executes the organising of relationships.

Any role that exists for soldiers in the authority, however small, will be a danger to the rule, the ruler and the State’s entity. This is because the rule within it is more appropriate for truth, within it there is restriction to the Shar’a and in it justice is realized. It pays no consideration to material power in relation to the rule, neither for the ruler nor the ruled. Its strength is hidden in its perception of the affairs of the people and its citizens, not due to the tools of execution it has. If the material power exists within it, it will spoil its nature as rule and transform it into mere absolute authority and domination; at this point there ceases to exist the reality of the rule and authority.. Accordingly it is not allowed for soldiers and the military apparatus to have any presence within it; rather they must remain tools in the hands of the ruler with absolutely no free will in the rule or opinion but rather mere dumb tools devoid of all that is related to will, opinion etc. This is in relation to its danger to the essence of the rule. As for its danger to the ruler, the military apparatus and soldiers are men within whom is the survival instinct, one of whose most important manifestations is leadership. If they are left to have a presence in the rule, and they see themselves as able to destroy the ruler and that they preserve him and his authority, they will imagine that they are the basis of authority and that upon them depends the ruler’s authority. This will agitate within them the sensation of leadership and add to it; also the material power is in their hands so they will take the rule by force from him. Therefore it is a calamitous danger for the ruler to allow the military apparatus or soldiers any presence in the authority. This occurred in the Islamic State in the time of the Abbasids and Ottomans. Some of the Khulafaa became weak in front of the soldiers, and it was not long before they overthrew them or made them tools in their hands. A result of this was the decline which occurred in the rule of the Islamic State in the days of these Khulafaa.

As for the danger of the presence of any role for soldiers in the rule to the Ummah’s entity and the State’s entity, the Islamic State due to the nature of the thought it carries is surrounded by enemies. The Shari’ah rule which the State and the Ummah must adhere to is that the whole world is either an Islamic homeland or a war homeland. The lands which rule by Islam and the Islamic flag shades them are the Islamic homeland; everything else throughout the world is Kufr or war homeland. Therefore the Islamic State is surrounded by enemies at all times waiting for the opportunity to attack. If soldiers are given any presence in the rule, however small their role, their incitement by the enemies is easier than the incitement of politicians since the nature of their work is material military work so it is difficult for them to understand remote manoeuvres and hidden political ramifications. Therefore they can be incited to seize the rule or change the rulers in exchange for some gains for the country according to their opinion or personal gains for them. Herein exists danger not to the ruling personalities nor upon the rule itself but upon the Ummah’s entity and the State’s entity because the Ummah’s entity is the collection of people together with the collection of concepts, measurements and convictions. The State’s entity is the collection of people with the authority to rule with the collection of measurements, concepts and convictions. If the soldiers seize the rule due to foreign incitement, there would infiltrate into them, i.e. the soldiers, concepts, measurements and convictions other than those in the State. Therein defects will enter into the State’s entity; there could even enter the influence of Kafir states which will result in dissipation and decline. Accordingly, tolerance for any presence for the military presence or soldiers in the authority i.e. rule is an abominable danger.

The Islamic Ummah Suffered from the danger of the presence of a role soldiers in authority via what befell it of the infiltration of defects into the entity of the State and Ummah, and then the destruction of the entity of the Islamic State and the entity of the Islamic Ummah from existence. In the last period of the Ottomans, the embassies of the Kafir states in Istanbul influenced the soldiers until there entered in the State apparatus unIslamic concepts, measurements and convictions. The role of Madhat Pasha and the officers together with him in creating these concepts, measurements and convictions is of the most prominent roles, particularly the coup that brought Abdulhamid to be the Khalifah and the coup that removed Abdulhamid from the Khilafah and brought Muhammad Rashad as Khalifah. Before that, the role of Muhammad Ali in Egypt was great in making himself a French agent in striking the Islamic Khilafah in Istanbul. Then the role of Mustapha Kamal, following the defeat of the Ottoman State in World War One, in conspiring with the English in destroying the Khilafah in exchange for removing the Khulafaa from Istanbul and helping him in the peace conference. These roles undertaken by soldiers shook the entity of the Islamic State and then removed it, and then removed the entity of the Islamic Ummah from existence. Therefore it is not allowed to permit the military apparatus or soldiers any presence in authority.